5 ms·

This is the top comment right now: https://www.dropbox.com/s/ie3mmcm0acuzxgv/Screenshot%202014-02-13%2015.31.50.png https://www.dropbox.com/s/ie3mmcm0acuzxgv/Sc

This is the top comment right now: https://www.dropbox.com/s/ie3mmcm0acuzxgv/Screenshot%202014-02-13%2015.31.50.png https://www.dropbox.com/s/ie3mmcm0acuzxgv/Screenshot%202014-... Do you read this 1000+ word well written point as "having no more substance than 'cops should die'"? Or did you simply decide that you should just ignore that post since it didn't fit your utterly insane narrative? Never mind the fact that even the exact post youre referencing doesn't even say the thing you keep claiming it says... I'm sure I'll continue being 0 for as long as I'm arguing a different point than yours, because you've shown that its not evidence, or eloquence that matters, rather how well aligned the other person's argument is aligned with your own. I doubt there is a forum where you will fit in well. Maybe you can just scream irrational nonsense at people on 4chan or something?

BlackDeath3 13y ago
I'm not necessarily talking about the current top comment in this particular thread. Christ, man. Why do so many people attempt a proof-by-example and then act surprised when it fails to convince?
- ryguytilidie 13y ago
  Um, so your two arguments so far have been: "The person I'm responding to LITERALLY said he wanted all police to die" "Well, he didn't literally say that, in fact, he didn't say anything close to that". "fuck the police shouldn't be the top comment" evidence is presented to the contrary "Dude, its not like I meant THIS top comment". There's no chance you're anything but a troll or stupid, so either way, I'm wasting my time. Cheers.
  - hmsimha 13y ago
    BlackDeath3's argument was that a voting system is the means through which the best comments, as deemed by the majority of users, receive the most exposure. You misunderstood them and referred them to the current top comment, pointing out that it was quite substantial. Without realizing it though, you were demonstrating their point.
    - BlackDeath3 13y ago
      Thank you. It's difficult to get your point across when somebody takes your words, twists them, and forces you into a whole separate argument based on those misconstrued words.
    - ryguytilidie 13y ago
      This was his point: "Voting should be independent of opinion, should it not? Voting should reflect the merit of a post regardless of its popularity, right? Comments with little more substance than "cops should die" shouldn't be at the top of a comment page, right?" Sentence by sentence just to make it easy on you: "Voting should be independent of opinion, should it not? Voting should reflect the merit of a post regardless of its popularity, right?" What does this even mean? How on earth would this work? He's genuinely upset that voting reflects peoples opinions? I'm shocked that someone could say this and not immediately realize what a dumb thing it is to say. But yeah, this problem in his mind, will be solved by finding a different community, with opinions he likes. See the problem now? "Comments with little more substance than "cops should die" shouldn't be at the top of a comment page, right?"" Right. And they aren't. So what is the complaint? Oh right, its a stupid strawman with no merit whatsoever, which i pointed out. If BlackDeath3 wants to throw a tantrum when someone says cops could die, he's more than welcome, but the idea that this is what he bases his argument on when no one said anything like that is utter lunacy. I cannot imagine going around being this irrationally angry. It's like being a republican and just screaming BENGHAZI!!! whenever confronted with something unsavory about your own party. Try living on planet earth with some rational people.
      - BlackDeath3 13y ago
        >What does this even mean? How on earth would this work? He's genuinely upset that voting reflects peoples opinions? I'm shocked that someone could say this and not immediately realize what a dumb thing it is to say. But yeah, this problem in his mind, will be solved by finding a different community, with opinions he likes. See the problem now? If I think that somebody has said something worth exposure, I upvote it. If not, I downvote it. It has nothing to do with whether I agree with it or not. Does it contribute to the conversation? Is it needlessly inflammatory? These are the sorts of questions I ask and answer when voting. You can argue that "worth exposure" is subjective, and it is, but I didn't say (or mean) vote objectively. One can try, but mostly I just meant that one should pay more attention to the merit of a post's content, rather than their personal agreement with it. >Right. And they aren't. So what is the complaint? You're too focused on the specifics. Shitty comments get upvoted all the time. Thoughtful but unpopular comments get downvoted all the time. Anybody who has been around these sorts of places (HN, Reddit, etc.) for more than an hour has seen it happen. And by the way, the "cops should die" comment quite literally was the top comment in this thread at one point. Perhaps you weren't here early enough to see it, but I did, and that's what made me say what I said.
  - spiritplumber 13y ago
    Fuck the police? Wrong, wrong wrong. Exactly the opposite. Do not fuck the police. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lysistrata http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lysistrata

BlackDeath3 13y ago

I'm not necessarily talking about the current top comment in this particular thread. Christ, man. Why do so many people attempt a proof-by-example and then act surprised when it fails to convince?

ryguytilidie 13y ago
Um, so your two arguments so far have been: "The person I'm responding to LITERALLY said he wanted all police to die" "Well, he didn't literally say that, in fact, he didn't say anything close to that". "fuck the police shouldn't be the top comment" evidence is presented to the contrary "Dude, its not like I meant THIS top comment". There's no chance you're anything but a troll or stupid, so either way, I'm wasting my time. Cheers.
- hmsimha 13y ago
  BlackDeath3's argument was that a voting system is the means through which the best comments, as deemed by the majority of users, receive the most exposure. You misunderstood them and referred them to the current top comment, pointing out that it was quite substantial. Without realizing it though, you were demonstrating their point.
  - BlackDeath3 13y ago
    Thank you. It's difficult to get your point across when somebody takes your words, twists them, and forces you into a whole separate argument based on those misconstrued words.
  - ryguytilidie 13y ago
    This was his point: "Voting should be independent of opinion, should it not? Voting should reflect the merit of a post regardless of its popularity, right? Comments with little more substance than "cops should die" shouldn't be at the top of a comment page, right?" Sentence by sentence just to make it easy on you: "Voting should be independent of opinion, should it not? Voting should reflect the merit of a post regardless of its popularity, right?" What does this even mean? How on earth would this work? He's genuinely upset that voting reflects peoples opinions? I'm shocked that someone could say this and not immediately realize what a dumb thing it is to say. But yeah, this problem in his mind, will be solved by finding a different community, with opinions he likes. See the problem now? "Comments with little more substance than "cops should die" shouldn't be at the top of a comment page, right?"" Right. And they aren't. So what is the complaint? Oh right, its a stupid strawman with no merit whatsoever, which i pointed out. If BlackDeath3 wants to throw a tantrum when someone says cops could die, he's more than welcome, but the idea that this is what he bases his argument on when no one said anything like that is utter lunacy. I cannot imagine going around being this irrationally angry. It's like being a republican and just screaming BENGHAZI!!! whenever confronted with something unsavory about your own party. Try living on planet earth with some rational people.
    - BlackDeath3 13y ago
      >What does this even mean? How on earth would this work? He's genuinely upset that voting reflects peoples opinions? I'm shocked that someone could say this and not immediately realize what a dumb thing it is to say. But yeah, this problem in his mind, will be solved by finding a different community, with opinions he likes. See the problem now? If I think that somebody has said something worth exposure, I upvote it. If not, I downvote it. It has nothing to do with whether I agree with it or not. Does it contribute to the conversation? Is it needlessly inflammatory? These are the sorts of questions I ask and answer when voting. You can argue that "worth exposure" is subjective, and it is, but I didn't say (or mean) vote objectively. One can try, but mostly I just meant that one should pay more attention to the merit of a post's content, rather than their personal agreement with it. >Right. And they aren't. So what is the complaint? You're too focused on the specifics. Shitty comments get upvoted all the time. Thoughtful but unpopular comments get downvoted all the time. Anybody who has been around these sorts of places (HN, Reddit, etc.) for more than an hour has seen it happen. And by the way, the "cops should die" comment quite literally was the top comment in this thread at one point. Perhaps you weren't here early enough to see it, but I did, and that's what made me say what I said.
- spiritplumber 13y ago
  Fuck the police? Wrong, wrong wrong. Exactly the opposite. Do not fuck the police. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lysistrata http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lysistrata